There is much confusion right now on how governance with the SNS-1 and SNSs in general will work. For example, I didn’t realize that proposals related to the SNS do not show up on the dashboard page and only show up, for now at least, in OpenChat.
This is in my opinion a big oversight. Having an easy way to vote is a ESSENTIAL part of being in a DAO. We really some good and easy UI for voting to come out ASAP. IMO it should be available on both the dashboard and on the NNS dApp, and potentially elsewhere.
Take your User Id from the bottom of your Open Chat profile page and add it as a Hotkey in your SNS1 Neurons, so you’re eligible to vote on the proposals.
Thanks for using my referral link! Let’s grow the Internet Computer, one DAO at a time.
I have been thinking about this too. On DSCVR, I put forward the idea to try and freeze the undissolved SNS1 tokens that are linked to known bot-farmers. This, apparently, is not really a possibility because these neurons can’t be tracked down.
I have a couple of other ideas, which I am happy to have shot down, to try and draw out the bot/human divide:
we set up a new ledger of SNS neurons, which is populated and reviewed by members of the dao, that has the aim of showing that each neuron is controlled by a human. Each neuron could submit the neuron id and some form of proof of humanity, which would trigger a review process.The idea of vouching for people could be used, or a random human neuron could be assigned to check the PoH content.
we could design proposals in a way that tricks bots, and identify them that way. One possibility is to have a window inside the voting period that (in)validates the vote. So if a proposal includes the message “do not vote for the first day”, all the votes in that time could be considered bots. There would probably need to be a 3 strikes rule or quarantine/appeal process.
Bot or not, I’m against the idea of freezing funds. I dont think it would be a good look for the ecosystem if it’d be easy to just freeze anyone’s funds, especially for a test token. We should instead find ways to prevent this from happening in future sales, which your ideas are a good start.
I don’t think your second idea would work. There are people who code the bots and they’re smart enough to just add some additional code to make sure that they don’t vote in the proposals or whatever you suggested.
In the UK there are lots of free parties whose location is a secret until only just before the event. It works surprisingly well. I am kind of suggesting something similar, but rather than share a location, share some other information last minute, like the approved voting slot, but it could be something else, like a canister address for voting.
I guess I like this idea because it’s a social solution, rather than a technical one, but it does rely on the social contract of keeping secrets from the machines. Regular showings of Terminator would probably help.
Hi @dfisher ,
we agree that voting is an essential part of the DAO and it is definitively the plan to add this to the NNS frontend dapp.
AFAIK it is not planned to add it to the dashboard (I am not sure how easy it would be as AFAIK there is no notion of “logged in principal” or similar on the dashboard yet).
It was a tradeoff whether we want to wait for all features to be ready to launch the first SNS or whether we want to go ahead and already take the opportunity to learn and collect feedback about the parts that we had. As SNS-1 was supposed to be an experiment and test and as we knew that through OpenChat there will at least be some frontend for neurons to vote, we decided to go ahead and keep adding features as they are ready.
Edit: Just learned that you can also vote on dscvr
In short, the idea is that the SNS subnet only hosts SNS canisters that run wasms that have been vetted by the NNS.
Also, this SNS subnet has a higher replication factor (more nodes) than other applications subnets currently do.
These two things should provide more security for the sensitive SNS canisters. This is explained in more detail in the original design discussion that was presented here.
Please let us know if you have further questions!
No, this is not possible. The current design only allow upgrading to wasms that are vetted by the NNS. The idea is that this makes it easier for users to verify the SNS canisters: they don’t need to verify all individual wasms, they can either trust the NNS to have vetted them or even if they want to verify themselves, they just need to verify at one place rather than for each individual SNS
Thanks for your response. I do understand that its a tradeoff between speed and having full features but I think the communication around what has been built and what hasn’t been built could have been improved. Everything is OK provided the community is just kept in the loop and these shortfalls do not come as a surprise.
I provide this feedback with love and am excited for what is to come.
